exact general purpose solvers for mixed integer bilevel
play

Exact General-Purpose Solvers for Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Exact General-Purpose Solvers for Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs Tutorial I. Ljubi c ESSEC Business School of Paris, France JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris Based on the papers: Part I: M. Fischetti, I. Ljubi c, M. Monaci, M. Sinnl:


  1. Exact General-Purpose Solvers for Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs Tutorial I. Ljubi´ c ESSEC Business School of Paris, France JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris

  2. Based on the papers: • Part I: M. Fischetti, I. Ljubi´ c, M. Monaci, M. Sinnl: On the Use of Intersection Cuts for Bilevel Optimization, Mathematical Programming, to appear, 2018 • Part II: M. Fischetti, I. Ljubi´ c, M. Monaci, M. Sinnl: A new general-purpose algorithm for mixed-integer bilevel linear programs, Operations Research 65(6): 1615-1637, 2017 Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 2

  3. Bilevel Optimization General bilevel optimization problem x ∈ R n 1 , y ∈ R n 2 F ( x , y ) min (1) G ( x , y ) ≤ 0 (2) y ′ ∈ R n 2 { f ( x , y ′ ) : g ( x , y ′ ) ≤ 0 } y ∈ arg min (3) • Stackelberg game: two-person sequential game • Leader takes follower’s optimal reaction into account • N x = { 1 , . . . , n 1 } , N y = { 1 , . . . , n 2 } • n = n 1 + n 2 : total number of decision variables Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 3

  4. Bilevel Optimization General bilevel optimization problem x ∈ R n 1 , y ∈ R n 2 F ( x , y ) min (1) G ( x , y ) ≤ 0 (2) y ′ ∈ R n 2 { f ( x , y ′ ) : g ( x , y ′ ) ≤ 0 } y ∈ arg min (3) Leader • Stackelberg game: two-person sequential game • Leader takes follower’s optimal reaction into account • N x = { 1 , . . . , n 1 } , N y = { 1 , . . . , n 2 } • n = n 1 + n 2 : total number of decision variables Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 3

  5. Bilevel Optimization General bilevel optimization problem x ∈ R n 1 , y ∈ R n 2 F ( x , y ) min (1) G ( x , y ) ≤ 0 (2) y ∈ arg min y ′ ∈ R n 2 { f ( x , y ′ ) : g ( x , y ′ ) ≤ 0 } (3) Leader Follower • Stackelberg game: two-person sequential game • Leader takes follower’s optimal reaction into account • N x = { 1 , . . . , n 1 } , N y = { 1 , . . . , n 2 } • n = n 1 + n 2 : total number of decision variables Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 3

  6. Optimistic vs Pessimistic Solution The Stackelberg game under: • Perfect information: both agents have perfect knowledge of each others strategy • Rationality: agents act optimally, according to their respective goals • What if there are multiple optimal solutions for the follower? ◮ Optimistic Solution: among the follower’s solution, the one leading to the best outcome for the leader is assumed ◮ Pessimistic Solution: among the follower’s solution, the one leading to the worst outcome for the leader is assumed Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 4

  7. Optimistic vs Pessimistic Solution The Stackelberg game under: • Perfect information: both agents have perfect knowledge of each others strategy • Rationality: agents act optimally, according to their respective goals • What if there are multiple optimal solutions for the follower? ◮ Optimistic Solution: among the follower’s solution, the one leading to the best outcome for the leader is assumed ◮ Pessimistic Solution: among the follower’s solution, the one leading to the worst outcome for the leader is assumed Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 4

  8. Our Focus: Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs (MIBLP) min c T x x + c T (MIBLP) y y (4) G x x + G y y ≤ 0 (5) y ∈ arg min { d T y : Ax + By ≤ 0 , (6) y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y } (7) x j integer , ∀ j ∈ J x (8) ( x , y ) ∈ R n (9) where c x , c y , G x , G y , A , B are given rational matrices/vectors of appropriate size. Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 5

  9. Complexity Bilevel Linear Programs Bilevel LPs are strongly NP-hard (Audet et al. [1997], Hansen et al. [1992]). min c T x min c T x Ax = b Ax = b ⇔ x ∈ { 0 , 1 } v = 0 v ∈ arg max { w : w ≤ x , w ≤ 1 − x , w ≥ 0 } w x Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 6

  10. Complexity Bilevel Mixed-Integer Linear Programs MIBLP is Σ P 2 -hard (Lodi et al. [2014]): there is no way of formulating MIBLP as a MILP of polynomial size unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses. Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 7

  11. Overview Part I • Develop a finitely convergent branch-and-bound approach (under certain conditions) • Capable of dealing with unboundedness and infeasibility • Introduce intersection cuts to speed-up convergence Part II • Introduce a fully-fledged branch-and-cut for MIBLPs Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 8

  12. STEP 1: VALUE FUNCTION REFORMULATION Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 9

  13. Our Focus: Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs (MIBLP) Value Function Reformulation: min c T x x + c T (MIBLP) y y (10) G x x + G y y ≤ 0 (11) Ax + By ≤ 0 (12) ( x , y ) ∈ R n (13) d T y ≤ Φ( x ) (14) x j integer , ∀ j ∈ J x (15) y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y (16) where Φ( x ) is non-convex, non-continuous: Φ( x ) = min { d T y : Ax + By ≤ 0 , y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y } • dropping d T y ≤ Φ( x ) → High Point Relaxation (HPR) which is a MILP → we can use MILP solvers with all their tricks • let HPR be LP-relaxation of HPR Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 10

  14. Our Focus: Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs (MIBLP) Value Function Reformulation: I am a Mixed-Integer Linear Program (MILP) min c T x x + c T (HPR) y y (10) G x x + G y y ≤ 0 (11) Ax + By ≤ 0 (12) ( x , y ) ∈ R n (13) (14) x j integer , ∀ j ∈ J x (15) y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y (16) where Φ( x ) is non-convex, non-continuous: Φ( x ) = min { d T y : Ax + By ≤ 0 , y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y } • dropping d T y ≤ Φ( x ) → High Point Relaxation (HPR) which is a MILP → we can use MILP solvers with all their tricks • let HPR be LP-relaxation of HPR Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 10

  15. Our Focus: Mixed-Integer Bilevel Linear Programs (MIBLP) Value Function Reformulation: min c T x x + c T (HPR) y y (10) G x x + G y y ≤ 0 (11) Ax + By ≤ 0 (12) ( x , y ) ∈ R n (13) (14) (15) (16) where Φ( x ) is non-convex, non-continuous: Φ( x ) = min { d T y : Ax + By ≤ 0 , y j integer , ∀ j ∈ J y } • dropping d T y ≤ Φ( x ) → High Point Relaxation (HPR) which is a MILP → we can use MILP solvers with all their tricks • let HPR be LP-relaxation of HPR Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 10

  16. Example • notorious example from Moore and Bard [1990] • HPR • value-function reformulation y 4 min x ∈ Z − x − 10 y 3 y ′ ∈ Z { y ′ : y ∈ arg min 2 − 25 x + 20 y ′ ≤ 30 x + 2 y ′ ≤ 10 1 2 x − y ′ ≤ 15 2 x + 10 y ′ ≥ 15 } x 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 11

  17. Example • notorious example from Moore and Bard [1990] • HPR • value-function reformulation y 4 x , y ∈ Z − x − 10 y min 3 − 25 x + 20 y ≥ 30 2 x + 2 y ≤ 10 2 x − y ≤ 15 1 2 x + 10 y ≥ 15 x 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 11

  18. Example • notorious example from Moore and Bard [1990] • HPR • value-function reformulation y 4 x , y ∈ Z − x − 10 y min 3 − 25 x + 20 y ≥ 30 Φ( x ) 2 x + 2 y ≤ 10 2 x − y ≤ 15 1 2 x + 10 y ≥ 15 y ≤ Φ( x ) x 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 11

  19. General Idea General Procedure • Start with the HPR- (or HPR-)relaxation • Get rid of bilevel infeasible solutions on the fly • Apply branch-and-bound or branch-and-cut algorithm There are some unexpected difficulties along the way... • Optimal solution can be unattainable • HPR can be unbounded Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 12

  20. (Un)expected Difficulties: Unattainable Solutions Example from K¨ oppe et al. [2010] Continuous variables in the leader, integer variables in the follower ⇒ optimal solution may be unattainable inf x − y x , y 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 y ′ { y ′ : y ′ ≥ x , 0 ≤ y ′ ≤ 1 , y ′ ∈ Z } . y ∈ arg min Equivalent to inf x { x − ⌈ x ⌉ : 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 } y 1 Bilevel feasible set is neither convex nor closed. Crucial assumption for us: follower subproblem depends only on integer leader variables J F ⊆ J x . x 1 Ivana Ljubi´ c (ESSEC) Exact General-Purpose Solvers for MIBLPs JFRO 2018, March 26, Paris 13

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend